Best Guess on New Gre Percentiles

[Kitkat]

P.S. Did anyone else notice huge typographical errors on the Princeton Review test?

One of the quantitative comparison questions lists the following equation: a + b + 1 = 3

So, I solved the question based on this. But, in the answers, the equation is given as ab + 1 = 3. Obviously, that made a difference as to whether you got the right or the wrong answer! I hope this doesn't happen in the actual test.

I noticed that they had several errors in both the verbal and quant sections for me. I ended up with a V-159, Q155, and hoping that that low score is due to the fact that there were those errors. I haven't heard of any issues like that with the actual test by ETS. It's probably due to the fact that they want as few problems as possible with people complaining about his or her scores due to bad questions and answers.

A friend of mine just took the revised GRE and her immediate score was not given to her with the new scores. Instead the comp showed her an approximate score range based on the old GRE scores, for example, 450-520 for the Verbal section. Hearing this confused me because I was assuming that ETS would present the score with the new score scale?? Has anyone taken the revised GRE yet and can you give some more info on this?

They are doing that right now for scores until November. They are getting all the scores so that they can do percentiles based on the new format rather then on what they think, or based on the previous test. They are giving a range of scores from the previous test so you have an idea of how you have done, but your friend can check her actual score in the beginning of November when they start sending them out to schools.

To quote the ETS website "

After completing the revised General Test, you will receive preliminary scores at the test center.

If you test between August and November 2011, you will see score ranges for the Verbal Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning measures that are based on the previous 200 – 800 GRE General Test reporting scales. The score ranges provided are intended to give you a sense of your performance on the two measures.

Beginning in November 2011, you will see your unofficial scores for the Verbal Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning measures that are based on the new 130 – 170 score scales.

Because of the Analytical Writing essay scoring process, you will not be able to view your Analytical Writing score at the testing center."

More information can be found here: http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/faq/

[George2248]

What I do not understand is the range in the results, if they gave it in the old format, why cant they give an specific grade?.... it is really frustating

[Kitkat]

I think it's because they aren't sure what the results are going to look like with the new format. They don't want to give you false hope that your score is one percentile, and have it be something lower when you get your actual scores. There is uncertainty, they know it, they don't want to give false hope. After all they have made a major change to the test. I know that it is stressful going into the application season not knowing this score definitely and all... but that goes back to the fact that they should have made this change earlier in the year. But they are doing it now and we have to deal with it.

[chak]

Kaplan, on the other hand, gave me:

Quant: 720 - 800 (24/40)

Verbal: 720 - 800 (34/40)

Wow, you must of gotten all 20 of the quant questions in the first section right or something. hehe

[H24]

So i took the actual revised test last week and got a total range of 1260-1460. That was 620-720 on verbal and 640-740 on math...

It's super-frustrating though, b/c on the old scale the PhD program i'm most interested in is looking for a 1300 minimum. It looks really hopeful with this range, but it's hard to tell.

Maybe someone can give me some feedback on this reasoning of mine though:

They are clearly estimating since they're giving a range. If that's the case, the middle-high end of the range is likely to be closer to their conservative estimate, since they wouldn't (hopefully!) want to give too much false hope. That is, if i actually ended up w/the equivalent of a 1260, i would think they would have given me an estimate more like 1060-1260 or 1160-1360. Any feedback on that?

It's of course a whole other issue of what this range of mine is actually equal to given the fact that i took a new test (i.e., a 1300 on the old test is not the same, ostensibly, as a 1300 on the new test)...

[H24]

I thought i'd stick this in here as a 2nd post so i didn't pack too much in the above, but i really do think it was irresponsible (to put it way too mildly) that ETS would 1) have this change go into effect right before application season (opposed to in say, Jan. or Feb.); and 2) that they would not just do it incrementally (which likely would've allowed them to continue to give actual scores right away, or at least more quickly).

SInce they've pretty recklessly done it like they have, i and many of us will get ranges that we're not entirely sure about, and have to make the f'd up decision of either retaking it (when we possibly did not need to) or finding out we scored too low in NOVEMBER, and having to re-take it after not having studied for 2-3 months.

I'm really considering an op-ed at some point, honestly, this is a stressful enough time for all of us already, let alone adding this crap in the mix.

Edited September 1, 2011 by H24

[CooCooCachoo]

P.S. Did anyone else notice huge typographical errors on the Princeton Review test?

One of the quantitative comparison questions lists the following equation: a + b + 1 = 3

So, I solved the question based on this. But, in the answers, the equation is given as ab + 1 = 3. Obviously, that made a difference as to whether you got the right or the wrong answer! I hope this doesn't happen in the actual test.

The Princeton Review completely screwed up on a lot of things in my case. It changed some answers; it counted answers that were correct as incorrect, even though the explanation showed that the answer was correct; and it counted some answered questions as unanswered. After spending about three hours on a practice test, finding out that the reported scores were pretty much useless was extremely frustrating and I'll be sure to steer clear from PR in the future. To be fair, it might have been a browser incompatibility (sometimes it took forever for questions to load, and some pictures in the quant sections would not load at all), which, since I didn't bother to check whether PR supports Google Chrome, would be my fault entirely.

[George2248]

The Princeton Review completely screwed up on a lot of things in my case. It changed some answers; it counted answers that were correct as incorrect, even though the explanation showed that the answer was correct; and it counted some answered questions as unanswered. After spending about three hours on a practice test, finding out that the reported scores were pretty much useless was extremely frustrating and I'll be sure to steer clear from PR in the future. To be fair, it might have been a browser incompatibility (sometimes it took forever for questions to load, and some pictures in the quant sections would not load at all), which, since I didn't bother to check whether PR supports Google Chrome, would be my fault entirely.

Yes but there were also typographical errors too, and even some wrong answers.... I did the 4 practices test they have and It is really frustrating. I am going to buy the Manhatan 4 test package and I hope they are better.

[Lox26]

Manhattan: (1440)

Quant: 740 (28/40, 9 omitted) 80th percentile

Verbal: 700 (30/40, 0 omitted) 97th percentile

Kaplan: (1410-1560)

Quant: 750-800 (32/40, 4 omitted) 82nd-94th percentile

Verbal: 660-760 (32/40, 0 omitted) 94th-99th percentile

According to these two tests, the true score is closer to the lower to middle of the range. Of course, these are two tests from only 2 companies that may or may not have exams that accurately approximate the difficulty of the new format.

I will post my scores from Princeton and PowerPrep when I take those exams.

[George2248]

Keep posting scores that way we have a larger data to compare...

Also: is there any way to buy kaplans test besides the free practice test? if there is, are they better than the manhatan test package?

[crater21]

To be fair, it might have been a browser incompatibility (sometimes it took forever for questions to load, and some pictures in the quant sections would not load at all), which, since I didn't bother to check whether PR supports Google Chrome, would be my fault entirely.

It's not just Google Chrome. I used the recommended version of Internet Explorer, and I still got the problems that you mentioned. I must have lost at least 2 minutes of time because of slow loading (somehow the clock keeps going!), and one of the pictures in the quant section didn't load either.

[Kitkat]

So practice test results first:

PR:

test 1 - V144, Q154

test 2 - V159, Q154

Kaplan:

test 1 - V32/40, Q32/40

PowerPREP

test 1 - V640-740, Q730-800

test 2 - V670-770, Q730-800

The last time I took the exam before the change (I decided to retake it to try to raise my quant score)

I got a V640, Q670

This time (Just took it yesterday)

I got a range of :

V740-800

Q740-800

Giving a total range of 1480-1600. I'm ecstatic if I am even on the very bottom of this range. Which is what I am basically going to assume for now until we get the official results in November. Although I will agree with previous posters in that I think that ETS is probably being conservative about their estimates with the scores. But I am thinking right now that at least with my range, it might be more likely that the numbers at most will end up in the middle of the range. So more of a 770-770 thing, possibly skewed more to the lower scores then anything.

[George2248]

So practice test results first:

PR:

test 1 - V144, Q154

test 2 - V159, Q154

Kaplan:

test 1 - V32/40, Q32/40

PowerPREP

test 1 - V640-740, Q730-800

test 2 - V670-770, Q730-800

The last time I took the exam before the change (I decided to retake it to try to raise my quant score)

I got a V640, Q670

This time (Just took it yesterday)

I got a range of :

V740-800

Q740-800

Giving a total range of 1480-1600. I'm ecstatic if I am even on the very bottom of this range. Which is what I am basically going to assume for now until we get the official results in November. Although I will agree with previous posters in that I think that ETS is probably being conservative about their estimates with the scores. But I am thinking right now that at least with my range, it might be more likely that the numbers at most will end up in the middle of the range. So more of a 770-770 thing, possibly skewed more to the lower scores then anything.

The only thing that is not proportional are your Princeton Scores, which are a little low when compared to the actual scores you got in the test

Is the test easier compared to Princeton Practices Exams?

[George2248]

Also, how did you get a second PowerPrep test? I thought there was only one with multiple level adaptative questions?

[Kitkat]

The only thing that is not proportional are your Princeton Scores, which are a little low when compared to the actual scores you got in the test

Is the test easier compared to Princeton Practices Exams?

With the Princeton Review, i think it wasn't just a matter of it being harder, but with the computer test also having a lot of errors in it, which I think is why there is such a huge difference with some of them. It wasn't even a matter of they had put in a wrong answer (a b instead of a d, that sort of thing), but in the actual test condition where I wasn't getting all of the reading passage or something like that.

Also, how did you get a second PowerPrep test? I thought there was only one with multiple level adaptative questions?

I didn't actually get a second scored test. What I did was I took the one scored one that they gave me when I started studying to see where I was, and where I needed to focus. That was about 3 months ahead. Half way through I used the untimed one to see where I was. Then I just retook the scored one to see where I was. It is probably not as accurate as if I took a brand new one, but it had been a while since I took/reviewed it, and I didn't see any need to memorize anything, it was *almost* like I was taking a new test. I recognized some questions, but I had to rethink my way though all of them.

[George2248]

I see congrats on those results, they are pretty good

[Kitkat]

I see congrats on those results, they are pretty good

Thank you!

I've been trying to dig around to find some information which might give me an idea of the percentiles on the new test. This is the only piece of information that I could find

http://www.ets.org/M..._supplement.pdf

They state on the second page that ets expects that the top 25% will be spread over 15 points.

So, please correct these numbers if I've made a mistake but, assuming a normal curve this gives a standard deviation of 7.42 and the following percentiles (score, percentile):

155 75th

156 79th

157 83rd

158 86th

159 89th

160 91st

161 93rd

162 95th

163 96th

164 97th

164 98th

166 98th

167 98th

168 99th

169 99th

170 99th

Thoughts?

I am wondering what other people's thought on this question that I have been thinking about. How do you think that they are working on getting these scores? After all it is still an adaptive test, but with sections now, rather then based on individual questions. So I am thinking that it is still more then just how many questions you get right or wrong. And this bothers me about the PR and Kaplan tests. I am not so sure that they are doing it as adaptive tests for their computer based practice tests, and therefore giving people a false idea either in the fact that they are doing better or worse then they would on the actual GRE. Any one else's thoughts?

[George2248]

Thank you!

I am wondering what other people's thought on this question that I have been thinking about. How do you think that they are working on getting these scores? After all it is still an adaptive test, but with sections now, rather then based on individual questions. So I am thinking that it is still more then just how many questions you get right or wrong. And this bothers me about the PR and Kaplan tests. I am not so sure that they are doing it as adaptive tests for their computer based practice tests, and therefore giving people a false idea either in the fact that they are doing better or worse then they would on the actual GRE. Any one else's thoughts?

I am usining Manhattan tests now and they are definitly section adaptative test, they even tell you each question dificulty level when you review it

[bdon19]

I'm really considering an op-ed at some point, honestly, this is a stressful enough time for all of us already, let alone adding this crap in the mix.

H24, I'm with you there. I've already gotten permission to write an op-ed on this for the first issue of my school's paper!

[H24]

H24, I'm with you there. I've already gotten permission to write an op-ed on this for the first issue of my school's paper!

Awesome--can you post it up here when you're done? Or send it via a private message or something? Thanks!

[Kitkat]

So i took the actual revised test last week and got a total range of 1260-1460. That was 620-720 on verbal and 640-740 on math...

It's super-frustrating though, b/c on the old scale the PhD program i'm most interested in is looking for a 1300 minimum. It looks really hopeful with this range, but it's hard to tell.

Maybe someone can give me some feedback on this reasoning of mine though:

They are clearly estimating since they're giving a range. If that's the case, the middle-high end of the range is likely to be closer to their conservative estimate, since they wouldn't (hopefully!) want to give too much false hope. That is, if i actually ended up w/the equivalent of a 1260, i would think they would have given me an estimate more like 1060-1260 or 1160-1360. Any feedback on that?

It's of course a whole other issue of what this range of mine is actually equal to given the fact that i took a new test (i.e., a 1300 on the old test is not the same, ostensibly, as a 1300 on the new test)...

I am thinking that it will be more like a 1360 for you. I am thinking that it will be a bell curve thing for them, cover their bases on both sides. Although I am sure that if they were wrong with percentiles and you did better onto the high side I am sure no one would complain. But I think that over all, from the looks of it, you have better odds of doing higher then a 1300 then below it. Do the programs you are looking at break it down by section, by percentile on how they want people applying to do? It might be easier to compare by those metrics since the whole thing is changing ...

[crater21]

Just wrote the GRE today, and thankfully, it went well. I got 750-800(V) and 710-800(Q).

It's a relief to be done (although, I do wish that quantitative range could have been higher).

In terms of practice tests, I did Kaplan, Princeton Review, and 3 Manhattan Prep tests.

Kaplan: 720-800(V) and 720-800(Q)

PR: 161(V) and 157(Q)

Manhattan: 760(V) and 650(Q)

Manhattan 2: 680(V) and 690(Q)

Manhattan 3: 710(V) and 650(Q)

So, it does seem like I peaked right on test day, which is great. But, I got the feeling the test was easier compared to the Manhattan tests.

Now, just worrying about how these will translate into percentiles, and the AW score!

[George2248]

Just wrote the GRE today, and thankfully, it went well. I got 750-800(V) and 710-800(Q).

It's a relief to be done (although, I do wish that quantitative range could have been higher).

In terms of practice tests, I did Kaplan, Princeton Review, and 3 Manhattan Prep tests.

Kaplan: 720-800(V) and 720-800(Q)

PR: 161(V) and 157(Q)

Manhattan: 760(V) and 650(Q)

Manhattan 2: 680(V) and 690(Q)

Manhattan 3: 710(V) and 650(Q)

So, it does seem like I peaked right on test day, which is great. But, I got the feeling the test was easier compared to the Manhattan tests.

Now, just worrying about how these will translate into percentiles, and the AW score!

Ive done also 3 manhatans (avg. 620V, 715Q), 3 princeton (AVG 153V, 160Q), 1 kaplan (580-680V, 750-800Q), 1 PP (550-650V, 750-800Q)

According to my scores (and yours) it looks like Manhatan Quant is a little harder than other tests. I was wondering if anyone else experience the same thing? Since I need more than 750 in Quant, I am a little worried with the Manhatan score that I got.

*keep posting scores, practice and real, so we can get a bigger sample

[kolja00]

Yes Manhattan's quant is a lot harder. All the other prep tests I've done gave me a 750-800 range and on Manhattan I average a 710.

I got a 750-800 on the actual GRE in the end.

[George2248]

Yes Manhattan's quant is a lot harder. All the other prep tests I've done gave me a 750-800 range and on Manhattan I average a 710.

I got a 750-800 on the actual GRE in the end.

That is good to know, at least that gives me hope... Does anyone have more that 750 or close in Manhattans tests?